Following on from my Canon Demi C review, I wanted to write something about the orphaned lens that came about from me only shooting it with the 50mm. Having that nice lens gathering dust in a box is no fun. And me getting my first interchangeable lens digital camera – the Fujifilm X-Pro1: My brain wants to try things out. With the X-Pro being digital results are instant when it comes to lenses and visual experimentation. I end up holding my unused Canon Demi C 28 mm lens in front of the image sensor. Getting an approximation of the correct distance from lens to film plane/sensor had me looking around for something to mount the lens on.
Modding
I’d glimpsed people’s (and companies’) body cap lenses on blogs so that seemed the approach to take in this case. The lens is only 47mm wide at the outer edge of the housing. And the distance to the film plane seemed to be within easy adjustment range.
So I made a hole in my only M39 body cap and adjusted the lens position after some fiddling (No: Carving). Then attached it with Sugru rubber clay and textile glue after adjusting for infinity and 1m focus.
As such, I am now in possession of a 28 mm half frame lens which will never give me a 42mm equivalent focal length on my X-Pro’s half frame sensor.
Aperture
There are no aperture setting options for the Canon lens since they are placed inside the lens mount on the Canon body. So the Canon is wide open, constantly at f2,8.
Focusing
The 28 mm Canon has a very short throw but feels very good, despite the zone focus “click stops”. I prefer a short throw over long ones. I’ve used lenses with 300-360 degrees’ throw on the focus ring and it’s very hard for me to get used to it. More – it’s annoying. But this lens is somewhere in Olympus XA and Olympus 35 RC territory when it comes to focus throw, which is very good.
Testing
Even in these dim light conditions the lens is easy to focus. It sharply renders details in the wood grain. However the images get blurry toward the edge of the picture. There’s a very visible limit to its field of focus. However the focus in the centre of the image is very much “good enough” for me to want to utilize the lens in these light conditions in future.
The blurred edges around the image has gotten me puzzled. Shouldn’t it be in focus in the whole frame since the Fuji sensor and the half-frame image surface both show the same size (42 mm) image? This is a question for you science people out there to answer in the comments section below.
On the outdoor pictures the problem of the lens non-focus zone on the right and left edges and also corners becomes very visible. I don’t mind it per se, considering the nature of the pictures I aim to take with it (family outings etc), but it is something to consider every time when composing the pictures. Maybe that’s a bit much to ask…
The lens renders very sharp in the middle regions – much more so than my Industar 69 which is a bit soft in colours and general focusing. Both are very good lenses for my retro-nostalgic preferences in picture making, though.
Conclusion
This modded experimental lens is – despite its limitations – a fun lens to use for my family occasions and excursions, where the X-Pro comes most to use, at the moment. Being strapped on cash, this is a “wide angle” solution I can live with. Also it feeds my unstoppable urge for shallow depth of field in images because of the permanent f2,8 aperture.
Thank you for bearing with me on this stupid journey of not discovering much we didn’t already know. Still, I hope you’ve learned something. Please share your thoughts in the comments section below.
My shop at Etsy: https://www.etsy.com/se-en/shop/getOurBooks/
My blog at: tobbetecknare.blogspot.se
Good work! I do like this sort of thing!
It’s blurry toward the edges, simply because of how differently camera sensors react to the angle of light compared to film – that’s as I understand it anyway
Thanks!
Well, that explains things. And I’ve come to understand that a lot of lenses are not performing at their best wide open.
I think the filmplane in the demi is curved. The whole angle of light thing should give fall off I think.
That explains a lot!
Is it curved – when you open the back you should be able to see
Hamish, very unlikely. The fall-off will be down to the usual performance of digital sensors with film-era lenses, as you say, plus any inherent drop off in edge performance of 99.9% of lenses, even Leica!
That was my gut response too
Highly unlikely, unless you have empirical evidence to the contrary.
Hi Tobias,
Interesting write up.
The Fuji X Pro 1 has an APS (C) size sensor (not half frame) which is a crop factor of 1.4. Hence a 28mm on the Fuji gives a field of view equivalent to 42 mm on full frame as you say (1.4 x 28 = 42).
I’m not familiar with the Cannon Demi, but if it is half frame the lens will be designed to provide a half frame image circle, not APS(C). You are lucky you only got blurred edges not vignetting. If you try the lens on a micro four thirds body it should work properly as the m43 sensor is almost the same size as half frame. Same logic applies to the Industar 69, it will not work on the Fuji XPro.
Hope this is clear!
Regards
Richard
Hi Richard,
The Xpro1 sensor is 23.6mm × 15.6mm, half frame is 24mm x 18mm – aps-c is a 1.5-1.6x crop depending on manufacturer
The Industar 69 works fine (ish) on aps-c too – here is a very old (cringeworthy) blog post from when I modded one to mount on a epson rd1 which has a 23.7 x 15.5mm sensor. It vignettes, but not to black.
Cheers,
Hamish
It can be a bit confusing when you first think about it because in your head you think “Full frame vs APS-C = 1.5x crop” and “half frame would be 2x crop”. It’s not illogical thinking, but it is incorrect. Simply because it is half frame, but only half in one of the two dimensions. APS-C crops in on the central portion of the sensor, which is harder to compare in your mind.
But, if you think of a rectangle, split it into four equal sections. Two of those would be “half frame.” One quadrant would be Micro 4/3. Two of those would also be APS-C.
Or, if it’s easier – Micro 4/3 (2x crop) is 0.5x on the horizontal and 0.5x on the vertical. APS-C (1.5x crop) would therefore be…. 0.5x (half) on the horizontal and merely 1x (no crop) on the vertical (and 0.5x + 1x = 1.5x).
I was a math/science nerd in high school, so it’s easy for me to approach it in such terms. Maybe would be for others too.
Hamish is absolutely correct about different sensors reacting differently to how light hits the sensor at various angles. For example, the Leica M8/M9 are notably better in the edges of the frame with certain M-mount lenses than, for example, a Sony full frame camera. Sensors are optimized for their native lenses, so some non-native lenses can react wildly different from sensor to sensor.
Xpro1 factor is 1.5
Matt. Also Leica sensors use angled microprisms.
Are we talking at crossed purposes? – https://www.fujifilm.eu/uk/products/digital-cameras/model/x-pro1/specifications-4484
“Image sensor 23.6 mm x 15.6 mm (APS-C) X-Trans CMOS with primary color filter”
Full frame is 24 x 36mm, half frame is 24 x 18mm – exactly half, but the frame is vertical
You’re quite right!
PS I think I read your post about modding the Industar 69 before I modified mine. Really pleased with the results.
Brilliant – which camera do you use it on?
I’d do it again, but these days the lenses cost a fortune compared to what they did back then…
Ha, That’s how I found your wonderful website as well. Use the Industar 69 on fujifilm x-pro1, and x-T2. Works great, but at f5.6 it’s too good, no personality, may as well use an autofocus lens. At f2.8 it’s nice, but don’t be tricked into putting the main subject anywhere but in the center if you need it to be sharp.
I use it on an Olympus Epl-3. The unmodified lens was £5.50 + £6.00 postage from Belarus! I’ll email you a sample pic.
Pingback: Modding a Halina Anastigmat f/3.5 45mm - by Tobias Eriksson - 35mmc